When you sit down to read, do you find yourself
feeling blank or sort of spinny? Squashed, bent
or just not there?

Sure you do. And here's why: You've gone past a
word you don't understand. In fact, the only
reason a person gives up studying or becomes
confused or unable to learn is because that
person went past a word that was misunderstood.

At least that's what the followers of the late
Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard want you to
believe, because that's the basis of Hubbard's
"breakthrough study technology," laid out in a
series of textbooks his adherents are pushing
for approval for use in schools across the
state.

Next month, the supplemental reading list for
California public schools, which includes the
works of Shakespeare as well as texts of Supreme
Court decisions and biographies of presidents
and kings, could have Hubbard added to its
inventory. If a 20-member citizens' review
committee approves the five books based on
Hubbard's writings, teachers and districts
statewide will be free to buy them on the
public's dime.

An author's bio in the back of Learning How To
Learn, the first book in the series, claims that
"L. Ron Hubbard's advanced technology of study
is now used by an estimated two million students
and thousands of teachers in universities and
school systems internationally. His educational
materials have been translated into 12 languages
to meet this worldwide demand for the first
truly workable technology of how to study."

But several educators who were asked to review
the materials for this story strongly disagree.
Johanna Lemlech, a professor of education at USC
specializing in curriculum and teaching, calls
the books "awful." They "violate everything we
know about how children learn, and appropriate
pedagogy," she says. "In short, these books
should be carefully placed in the cylindrical
file."

To the committee deciding if Hubbard's books
should land, instead, in the public schools,
such analysis is of no import. Committee members
aren't concerned with whether the books are
decent learning tools, or, for that matter,
whether they're part of a campaign by a front
for the Church of Scientology to brainwash
schoolchildren. Their decision will be based
solely on "social content": the absence of overt
religious dogma, and the equitable portrayal of
girls, minorities and children with
disabilities. In other words, assurance that the
books are politically correct. The books will
escape the kind of scrutiny that would question
flaws such as confusing methods of instruction
or thinly veiled church jargon, because they are
being considered for use only as "supplemental,"
or secondary, texts.

"We receive literally thousands of books a year,
and we want to make sure they meet the minimum
legal requirements," says Doug Stone, spokesman
for the California Department of Education,
which oversees the committee. "When push comes
to shove, the final arbiter in terms of academic
content would be the districts themselves."

One member of the Los Angeles school board is
unimpressed. A former high school history
teacher, David Tokofsky calls the books
"remedial" and says they would be of little use
to any but the lowest-performing students. "If
you walked into an eighth-grade class and tried
to use these books on kids who are at the proper
level, you'd kill them," says Tokofsky, who
coached the Marshall High School Academic
Decathlon team to a national championship in
1987. "They're not even good comic books."

At the heart of Hubbard's study technology lies
a practice called Word Clearing (always
capitalized), a cumbersome process by which
students look up misunderstood words and try to
understand them. This process is outlined in
each of the textbooks, starting with Learning
How To Learn, which consists largely of
captioned illustrations and is recommended for
children ages 6 to 12.

When is Word Clearing employed? "If you are
studying and do not feel as bright as you did,
or if you are taking too long on what you are
studying, or you are yawning, or doodling, or
daydreaming." In other words, darn near all of
the time.

Each time this happens, the reader is instructed
to follow these steps:

Step 1: "Look earlier in your book and find the
word you do not understand." The girl in the
illustration in Learning How To Learn reads "The
leg of his pants was torn," and appears to be
stuck on the word leg.

Step 2: "Find the word in the dictionary." In
steps 3 through 5, the girl finds the right
definition, reads it and uses it in a sentence.

Step 6: "When you understand the definition that
fits in what you were reading, then learn each
of the other definitions the same way."

Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 10th
edition, lists seven definitions for the word
leg. Among them: "one of the rather generalized
segmental appendages of an anthropod used in
walking and crawling"; "a side of a right
triangle that is not the hypotenuse"; "the
course and distance sailed by a boat on a single
tack."

That poor little girl. There she was, minding
her own business and doing her work, maybe
taking a little too long for her teacher's
satisfaction, and now she's stuck in an endless
linguistic loop. If she is having trouble
understanding these definitions, she may - the
books suggest - be suffering "lack of mass,"
which she should be able to remedy by
constructing clay models of any words or images
she doesn't understand. Or perhaps she's come
down with a case of "skipped gradient," having
tried to leap ahead in her learning instead of
taking the step-by-step approach essential to
success.

Which leads to Step 7: "After you learn all of
the definitions of that word then go back to
what you were reading. If you are not bright and
ready to study again, then there is still
another word that you do not understand. Do
steps 1-7 again until you are bright and ready
to study again."

Or, more likely, ready to throw the book across
the room in frustration.

And no wonder. "In many cases, lack of
comprehension is not because of a misunderstood
word," says Sidnie Myrick, who leads a UCLA
research group on early literacy, teaches a
master's course in reading at Cal State L.A.,
and also teaches a class of first, second and
third graders at Thomas Edison Elementary School
in Glendale (she was Glendale's 1993 Teacher of
the Year). "In fact," she says, "in many cases
the student won't get the meaning until the
material is presented in a completely different
way."

Myrick also finds the books' illustrations
"cutesy and condescending," the explanations
"stilted and manufactured," and study
technology, all in all, "woefully inadequate."

In a 1964 lecture, Lafayette Ron Hubbard
expressed his concern with the state of
education: "The whole educational system, as I
see it, of total duress, total squash on the
individual, in view of the fact that it's a
system that's full of lies, I think it's about
the most destructive thing you could have around
at all." Enter Applied Scholastics, a nonprofit
organization founded in 1972 by a group of
Scientologists to promote study technology,
originally developed by Hubbard to help his
followers get a grip on his religious writings
and later expanded to apply to the world at
large.

Today, Applied Scholastics is just one branch of
a Scientologist-run organization called the
Association for Better Living and Education, or
ABLE, charged with disseminating Hubbard's
educational teachings around the globe. Applied
Scholastics alone claims more than 200 centers
worldwide, from Malaysia to Zimbabwe to Denmark.
In the Los Angeles area there are eight
privately run Applied Scholastics schools using
the materials. There's also an after-school
tutoring program in Compton called the World
Literacy Crusade, the Hollywood Education and
Literacy Project, or HELP, and something called
the Applied Scholastics International Training
Center (which in reality is the Hollywood
Boulevard offices of Applied Scholastics, where
training sessions are periodically held).

The official defender of Hubbard's study
technology is ABLE president Rena Weinberg, a
petite, fierce woman with a clipped South
African accent and cascades of brown hair. She
waxes nostalgic about the many years she spent
spreading study technology throughout her
racially riven native country. "We trained tens
of thousands of teachers through the whole
apartheid era right into the new government, and
now the program is of course supported by the
government," she says. "It's fabulous."

Applied Scholastics' publications and Web site
are packed with "success stories." Its 1995
annual report boasts of a training program in
Mexico for 1,200 teachers under whom "more than
30,000 students benefited from the application
of this study technology in the classroom," and
one in Zimbabwe where 7,500 children are being
taught with "outstanding results." Similar
claims are made of programs in Ghana, Hungary
and Sydney.

There is little explication of these benefits,
and in at least one case the "outstanding
results" are misleading. The report cites St.
Antoine, a public elementary school in
Lafayette, Louisiana. It claims that after the
school's three second-grade teachers were
trained in the study technology techniques
outlined in Applied Scholastics' Basic Study
Manual, their students' California Achievement
Test composite scores in reading, English and
math rose from the 29th percentile to the 46th
percentile. The report also claims that this was
the first time St. Antoine "ever achieved a
rating higher than the 30th percentile," which
school principal Helen Magee says is false.

Magee confirms the increase in overall scores,
but says that just one of the second-grade
teachers received the study technology training.
The scores of the students in that class did go
up 17 percent, while in the other two classes
the scores went up 13 percent and 2 percent.
Magee says she was initially enthusiastic about
expanding the use of study technology, but when
several other teachers at the school were later
trained, the outcome was disappointing. "I did
not see the same results," she says. "I think
you have to have a certain kind of teacher to
make it work."

A Scientologist kind of teacher, perhaps. While
Applied Scholastics has no official connection
to the Church of Scientology, there are numerous
unofficial links. Board members include
celebrity Scientologists John Travolta, Isaac
Hayes and Anne Archer, who is touted as the
organization's "international spokesperson." All
Applied Scholastics books are published by
Bridge Publications, which exists solely to
churn out Hubbard's works. (In Scientologese,
"The Bridge" is a series of costly courses
purporting to lead one to a higher, pain-free
state of existence.)

Applied Scholastics spokeswoman Weinberg insists
that there is nothing remotely Scientological
about the study technology texts, which, she
says, are strictly educational. "You go, 'Oh, L.
Ron Hubbard the religious leader,'" she says.
"That's how you see it. That's not how he saw
himself. He was an author, first and foremost. A
humanitarian. What's the commonality between
Scientology, Dianetics and Applied Scholastics?
Is it the religion itself? No. It's the person.
That's all there is. That's the commonality."

But the books speak for themselves. In Learning
How To Learn, "L. Ron Hubbard" is printed across
the cover in type as large as the title. The
terms "lack of mass" and "skipped gradient,"
which appear throughout the books, have obvious
Scientological equivalents. In Scientology,
"mental mass" describes an undesirable image in
the mind. And a series of "gradients" must be
passed through in order for church adherents to
reach higher states of being, the highest being
the state of Clear, which itself sounds a lot
like the state to which students aspire through
Word Clearing. Many pages in the books are
devoted to listing and illustrating the symptoms
children will suffer when they don't "clear up"
words. Children who don't follow the proper
procedure could end up feeling "squashed,"
"bent," "blank" or "not there."

"As simple as it seems," goes a note to parents
and teachers in several of the volumes, "many of
the tribulations in children's lives can often
be traced back to words they have not understood
in their reading materials or in life." In fact,
Hubbard claimed, proper application of study
technology should eliminate learning
disabilities and attention-deficit disorders,
which he did not consider real. Students with
these disorders "are failing to learn because no
one has ever taught them how to learn,"
according to Weinberg. No one has taught them
"how to identify the barriers to learning and
how to overcome these barriers."

Meanwhile, in Hubbard's Dianetics: The Modern
Science of Mental Health, which is basically a
primer for Scientology, "dopey, sleepy or dull"
feelings are described as symptoms of a shutdown
of the analytical mind, which must be in optimum
condition in order for an individual to
progress. And in Scientology, ailments such as
asthma, arthritis and bursitis are considered
"psychosomatic ills," curable through diligent
use of Hubbard's techniques.a

One last thing: The first text in the
educational series is called Learning How To
Learn. The word Scientology, as defined by
Hubbard himself, means "knowing how to know."

"The materials are a Trojan horse to introduce
Scientological concepts to young people,"
concludes one prominent university professor who
specializes in language development among
children and who reviewed the Applied
Scholastics texts for this story. (Citing past
cases in which critics of Scientology have been
stalked and sued, he asked that he not be named.
"Given the way that Scientologists respond to
people they perceive to be their enemies," he
says, "I would have to want to get involved in a
crusade.")

The close relationship between Scientology and
study technology appears to be openly
acknowledged by the church's faithful. In
Chapter 10 of Dianetics, Hubbard refers to
"Educational Dianetics," which he says "contains
the body of organized knowledge necessary to
train minds to their optimum efficiency and to
an optimum skill and knowledge." A call to the
toll-free Dianetics information line to inquire
about this course of study yields a referral by
the operator to the Basic Study Manual, one of
the five Applied Scholastics books up for
approval. "That's what Educational Dianetics
is," the operator says. "It's study technology,
which is a part of Scientology."

Across the country, followers of L. Ron Hubbard
are already quietly applying his teachings in
the public schools, as teachers, career-day
speakers and after-school volunteers. In many
cases, their connection to Scientology is left
unmentioned. And perhaps that is how Hubbard
would have wanted it. In a vintage bit of
Hubbard subterfuge, reprinted in the St.
Petersburg Times, he outlines the means by which
a housewife can turn a women's club into an
organ for the church. He instructs that she
first get the club's affairs in order, and then
begin selling Scientology as a way to keep the
kids in line, fix up marriages and "whatever
comes to hand, and even taking fees for it." He
advises discretion. "Don't ask for permission,"
he says. "Just enter them and start functioning
to make this group win through effectiveness and
sanity."

This past summer, a Los Angeles elementary
school teacher named Linda Smith requested
permission from the school board to start a
charter school in the San Fernando Valley. It
was later revealed, amid much media hoopla, that
Smith is a Scientologist and that she planned to
use the Hubbard texts at the school. Smith said
she didn't mention that she was a Scientologist
in her application because she didn't think it
was relevant, and she didn't mention that she
planned to use Hubbard's books because she was
awaiting licensing from Applied Scholastics. Yet
no licensing is required in order to use the
books, according to Weinberg. Smith eventually
withdrew her application, claiming an illness in
her family.

Smith's story becomes more disturbing when
considered as the latest in a long line of
questionable strategies employed by Applied
Scholastics and other organizations run by
Scientologists that target schoolchildren, not
only in the Los Angeles area, but across the
state, the nation and beyond. One particularly
sweeping example, which came to light in the
early 1990s, was the widespread distribution of
a Hubbard booklet titled The Way to Happiness.
Although the booklet is presented as free of
church doctrine, Scientology officials estimated
that 6.8 million copies had been given to chil-a
dren in schools across the United States,
calling it "the largest dissemination project in
Scientology history" and the "bridge between
broad society and Scientology."

L. Ron Hubbard's textbooks have already been
rejected twice by the citizens' review panel,
known as the Legal Compliance Committee and made
up of retired teachers and principals, parents,
a building contractor and a phone-company
technician. But there's no limit on
reapplication, and Applied Scholastics has been
persistent, modifying the books to address the
committee's concerns over the lack of
representation of girls and minorities and then
resubmitting them.

Rovina Salinas, a consultant with the Contra
Costa County Office of Education, chairs the
20-member committee, one of several throughout
the state that divvy up the thousands of books
and other educational materials submitted each
year for approval as supplemental texts in the
public schools. Typically Salinas breaks the
committee into four subgroups, and any given set
of texts will be reviewed by just one of these
groups. The first time the Applied Scholastics
books came through, Salinas decided, in an
unusual move, to have two of the subgroups
consider them independently. Both groups were
troubled by the Scientology connection. Salinas,
too, found it worrisome.

"My one concern was that there was some sort of
subliminal message," Salinas says. "Something
that you would really have to read between the
lines to determine." But that type of message is
beyond the committee's purview. Members were not
permitted to review Scientology texts for
similarities, because, Salinas says, their job
with regard to religious content is merely to
look for any overt attempts at inculcation or
bias toward one religion over another.

For her part, Weinberg dismisses as groundless
any fear that the Applied Scholastics materials
are a recruiting tool. "Do people get brought
into Scientology" as a result of using these
books? she asks. "Hell no. That's not the aim.
They go and learn how to study. They go off and
they do their studies. That's what they do."

Upon request, Weinberg has arranged for a
meeting with a public school teacher who uses
the Applied Scholastic materials in the
classroom. After the interview in her office,
she brings in Teresa Posner, who teaches
sixth-grade math and science at Porter Middle
School in Granada Hills.

Shortly after she received her credential,
Posner says, she learned about Applied
Scholastics from a friend and began using the
techniques of study technology. Eventually, she
wanted to learn more. "After studying the
Hubbard study techniques for about three years,
I wanted to know what other things Hubbard did,"
she recalls. She began devouring his science
fiction, and his religious writings as well. She
was so impressed that she joined the church.
"The principles of Scientology," she says, "just
made so much sense."

Since Weinberg had just emphatically denied that
people like Teresa Posner exist, it's hard to
believe she set up this interview, right here in
the president's office at the international
headquarters of Applied Scholastics. Apparently
the company representative monitoring the
conversation can't believe it either. He quietly
slips out of the room. Within minutes, two
Applied Scholastics staffers appear, inform
Posner of an emergency phone call and escort her
away. End of interview. End of story.

L. Ron Hubbard Strikes Back

LA Weekly
12/12/1997

As reported in the Weekly a few weeks back ("The
Learning Cure" by Sara Catania, November 14-20), the
folks at Scientology-affiliated textbook publisher
Applied Scholastics think pretty highly of their L. Ron
Hubbard-inspired pedagogy. In their push to qualify a
series of five Applied Scholastics texts for public
school use statewide, the company has touted the books'
ability to help students think, speak and write for
themselves.

It seems odd, then, that the honchos at Applied
Scholastics apparently don't trust their own followers'
expressive abilities. A misrouted fax rolled into our
offices the other day, from one Margaret McCarthy at
Applied Scholastics headquarters to one "Daryl at
Player's Choice," a trophy shop in Santa Ana. By all
appearances, Ms. McCarthy is directing Daryl on what to
write in a letter to the editor of the Weekly.

We'd like to print the entire five-sentence fax, but we
can't. As litigious as it is secretive (never mind
vindictive), the Church of Scientology recently won a
Supreme Court decision against critics who posted
copies of Hubbard's "doctrine" on the Web, a decision
that put new limits on what's known as "fair use" of
private correspondence and writings.

So, by way of summary, McCarthy opens the missive to
"Daryl" with instructions for her to re-type an
enclosed letter to the editor on her own company
letterhead. And then things get weird. McCarthy uses
some secret symbolic notation - two vertical lines
alternating with two dots - to warn Daryl against
making mistakes in the letter. As in: "Be careful of
typos, etc. This is a [secret symbol] publication and
you know they'll nail us for any boo boos."

We never got the chance. We called McCarthy and asked
if she was orchestrating a letter-writing campaign
against the Weekly, but she wouldn't say. Nor would she
explain for us the meaning of the secret symbol. (If
anyone can tell us, we're dying to know.) McCarthy said
it was "impossible" that her fax to Daryl arrived here
mistakenly, and demanded to see a copy of it before she
would answer any questions. So we sent it back and
waited for her call. We're still waiting.

Letters to the editor

LA Weekly
December 12-18 issue

LEARNING CURVE

Dear Editor:

Sara Catania's sarcastic piece about L. Ron Hubbard's study
technology ["The Learning Cure'" November 14-20] was a disgrace. As
international spokesperson for Applied Scholastics, I have firsthand
experience with the work that volunteers all over the world are doing
utilizing Hubbard's discoveries. These individuals devote hundreds of
hours of time and heartfelt effort to help both young people and adults
improve their study skills. Their work daily changes lives.

As a parent, I also have firsthand knowledge with the application
of study technology. There is no question as to its efficacy. It works,
plain and simple, and I have a terribly bright and terrifically competent
son who reminds me of the fact daily.

There is no good reason to deny students in our public schools
access to study technology. Millions of parents have become so desperate
that they allow their children to be drugged in the false belief that
Ritalin will succeed where the schools have failed. In such a context, how
dare anyone suggest that using a dictionary or learning the correct
meanings of words could be even slightly controversial?

-Anne Archer
Beverly Hills

Dear Editor:

Sara Catania's cynical and cursory review of L. Ron Hubbard's study
technology was surprising above all for its naivete. The real problems of
illiteracy and educational failure are a serious matter, not a joke, and
any effort to remedy them deserves more than offhand sarcasm.

According to a recent report from the California Reading Task
Force, a majority of California's children cannot read at basic levels.
These are our children. Yet rather than education, Catania seems fixated
on the relationship between Applied Scholastics and the Church of
Scientology. I can clear the matter up in one sentence. At Applied
Scholastics, we are grateful and proud of the many years of tremendous
support we have received from the Church of Scientology - and we will
welcome that support for years to come.

Catania also apparently couldn't find time to interview even one of
the hundreds of Applied Scholastic's volunteers who are working one-on-one
with inner-city youth. Or the non-Scientology religious and community
leaders who consider Hubbard's methods a lifeline for underserved
minorities.

If Catania had exhibited any real curiousity about how Hubbard's
methods benefit students, she might have had something substantive to
discuss with the experts she interviewed. Instead, she presented
speculative comments from individuals with almost no familiarity with them.
Further, she chose not to interview any of the many experts and educators
who do have firsthand experience with their efficacy.

But let's get down to the real issue - our educational crisis
becomes graver with each passing day. And the real story, which Catania
chooses to ignore, is that L. Ron Hubbard's study technology is making a
difference.

Let's face facts. If we do not solve the problems of illiteracy,
we could be headed for a new dark age. Hubbard had the courage to provide
revolutionary solutions to our 20th-century educational crisis - and we
need to raise our sights to the level of a man of such vision.

I was surprised and disappointed at the poor journalism in your
article "The Learning Cure." I felt it was written to prove a point, not
written from actual research.

I am the founder of a technology company that has grown from two
employees to 800 in just over three years. I'm 26 years old, and have been
written about in many national publications as a young success.

I never attended college, and I attribute much of my success to my
education at the Delphian School of Oregon, which trains its students in
the use of Hubbard's study technology. This technology allows you to get
the most out of the study of any subject. Knowing it, I was able to
accomplish my post-high school education on my own.

Being able to thoroughly understand any subject you tackle is an
invaluable skill, and Hubbard's study technology made this possible for me.
If Catania had taken the time to objectively interview several people who
actually use Hubbard's technology, she would have discovered that they were
thriving in their studies, and actually studying faster than previously.

I walked away from that article with the feeling the author had an
ax to grind. Why? The "crisis of education" is a national concern, and
everyone agrees that our school system needs major reform. We need
something that works in schools and makes universal education possible. If
Hubbard's technology is working, why attack it?

-Sky Dayton
Founder
Earthlink network Inc.

Dear Editor:

The answer to the question "Can L. Ron Hubbard's study technology
make kids smarter?," posed and never answered, is an emphatic "Yes!"

It is very easy to be a critic. It is not so easy to roll up one's
sleeves and step in to help people who are having difficulty in literacy
and learning, as the volunteers, parents, tutors and teachers involved with
Applied Scholastics are doing every day.

Study technology is not an untried theory, but a proven system
whereby a person can become self-sufficient in any learning environment
using effective "tools," including a dictionary. The result of this
process is that one understands and can use the information being learned -
a goal that education is seeking in our fast-paced techno-society. These
tools for learning are not some new study aid or memorization technique or
phonetic-reading program. Rather, these tools are part and parcel of the
subject of how individuals learn, combined with actual procedures and
methods of applying these principles on an individual basis, to give one
the means to grasp any subject.

Central to Hubbard's study technology is a delineation of the
primary barriers to study that constitute the underlying reasons for most
educational failures. Educators may speak of "learning disabilities."
Their students are failing to learn because no one has taught them how to
learn, how to identify the barriers to learning and how to overcome these
barriers.

A few key symptoms that study technology overcomes include why a
student gives up on a particular study (often after initially liking it),
why they appear dull and confused after certain studies, and what is the
primary reason that students drop out or lose interest in learning.

-Ian Lyons
President
Applied Scholastics International

Dear Editor:

Excellent article. I hope that you are left in peace after
publishing it.

I am glad that word is getting out on Applied Scholastics, as it
very much is a vehicle to get L. Ron Hubbard technology and ethics into the
"WOG" world.

-Betty Rhodes
Los Angeles

Dear Editor:

I'd like to commend Sara Catania and the L.A. Weekly for publishing
this article, and I hope you will stand up against Scientology harassment.
Your article investigated the heart of the topic: whether this study
technology has any educational value. The scholars quoted in the article
confirmed my own opinions, based on my experience at university and at work.

I think that Word Clearing (looking up every word in the
dictionary) is a thought-stopping technique. like counting sheep or saying
"Hare krishna" 2,000 times. While such techniques are excellent to get to
sleep or to get obedience, they are counterproductive in an environment
where individual thinking is important. This certainly applies to all
schools in the Western world.

-Tilman Hausherr
Berlin, Germany

Dear Editor:

Despite the plain-vanilla fluff and rather uninspired teaching
techniques that Scientologists try to push into the minds of
schoolchildren, there are really only three things that Scientology teaches
well: manipulation, deception and the selling of $cientology.

Make no mistake about it - Scientology's front groups, including
those that purportedly offer "learning technology," are all pieces of bait
on a large, aggressive and expensive hook. The organization itself was
founded by a con man and continues to be led by those who will go to great
lengths to silence critics and former members of the cult.

-Mark Dallara
Tampa, Florida

Dear Editor:

Fantastic, excellent work by Sara Catania. She and the Weekly
should be commended for the production of such a frank and accurate
description of Scientology's study technology. As a mother and a taxpayer,
I thank you. I shudder to think of my children being educated with such
mind-controlling, thought-stopping material

-Sandra Jamison
Robins AFB, Georgia

Scientology Decoded

LA Weekly
12/19/1997

OffBeat readers, take heart. The cryptic Scientology
notation described here last week has been decoded.

The notation, "1.1", was in a fax - mistakenly sent to
our machine - from an employee of
Scientology-affiliated textbook publisher Applied
Scholastics to a Santa Ana merchant, directing her on
what to write in a letter to the Weekly's editor.
(We've been flooded with pro-Scientology mail since we
published an article critical of a series of five
textbooks inspired by the teachings of church founder
L. Ron Hubbard ["The Learning Cure" by Sara Catania,
November 14-20].) The fax warns: "Be careful of typos,
etc. This is a 1.1 publication and you know they'll
nail us for any boo boos."

The notation, as many readers kindly alerted us, comes
from the late L. Ron Hubbard's mental Tone Scale, which
ranges from 40 (serenity of beingness) to negative 40
(total failure). According to the online Scientology
handbook (www.scientologyhandbook.org/full.htm), 1.1,
"the most dangerous and wicked level," means "covert
hostility" - a common designation bestowed on the
Church's perceived enemies. Applied Scholastics
president Ian Lyons confirmed the notation's meaning,
saying, "There is no secret about it."

Also, due to an editing error, OffBeat last week stated
that the Church of Scientology won a Supreme Court case
limiting the right of critics to reprint internal
Church documents (on the Internet, for instance). In
fact, the ruling came from a Federal District Court
Judge in Alexandria, Virginia.

Back at the Weekly, we are holding out for an upgrade
to 1.9, just plain "hostility."

The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the
author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and
opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The
opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.

This web page (and The Skeptic Tank) is in no way connected with
nor part of the Scientology crime syndicate. To review the crime syndicate's
absurdly idiotic web pages, check out www.scientology.org or any one of the
many secret front groups the cult attempts to hide behind.